Who remembers this talk and can cooborate what I have found? I googled LDS ensign magazine Nov. 2009, found his talk about Love and Law, and was shocked to see that all the hidious , unchristlike portions have been removed or changed. I posted on another post that my daughter now hates me because of his words, I heard his talk in Oct. 2009 first hand sitting in front of the TV aghast, and now find they are no longer there. Did anyone else know of these changes or hear the original talk? I know back then it was all over this board. Is there any place we can get his original talk as he first gave it?

From my other post:

I just looked it up and read the entire talk. It has been ABSOLUTELY altered, and we all know this is NOT the first time one of the GA's has had to change/alter their talk. It is not even close to some of the stuff he was saying and I mean it was so unchristlike and offensive, talk of it was ALL over this board.

To my best remembrance and horror he said for one thing that we hear that love for children and parents should be" unconditional" and that that saying is untrue. That there is no such thing as unconditional love. Even God's love for us is conditional upon our keeping of his commandments. That our loved ones need to be in obedience to God's commandments to earn or be worthy of our love. He said if your kids or your parents are not living the commandments of God, you have no requirement to love them.

That is as nearly as I can remember the most offensive parts of what he said, but he repeated these sentiments more than once. It was horrifying, and many people on the board here were talking about how awful it was. If you do not believe me, post a question and I am sure you will get others that remember it clearly.

I sat before the TV and watched the entire thing at the same time Captain Moroni did at his home. We spoke of it extensively. I cried. And yes, as they have done before, Oakes was obviously called out and forced to change the bulk of his talk, I mean it is hardly even recognizable. That is just disgusting! I want to print it out and give it to my daughter that also saw it and hates me, and show her how they made him change his words. It was truly the most unChristlike talk I have ever heard in my life, and POOF! Now it is gone! UNBELIEVABLE!!!!

Check out these last 2 paragraphs of his NEWLY REVISED talk:

This sobering teaching reminds us that when family members are not united in striving to keep the commandments of God, there will be divisions. We do all that we can to avoid impairing loving relationships, but sometimes it happens after all we can do.

In the midst of such stress, we must endure the reality that the straying of our loved ones will detract from our happiness, but it should not detract from our love for one another or our patient efforts to be united in understanding God’s love and God’s laws.

What a con and a joke this whole stinking church is - he said nothing of the sort, rather just the opposite. The entire jist of his talk was : DO NOT love those that do not obey the commandments, and that even God does not, because there is no such thing as unconditional love. It must be earned through obedience to God's commandments. It was about shunning basically, and when it should be done. It was horrible.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2010 09:32PM by think4u.

I never read the original talk, but I certainly remember the uproar, the upset and the discussions right after the talk had been delivered. And I do remember the excerpts from it that people posted right afterwards.

It's also not the first one I've heard of which had been completely altered.

I don't think this will offer much comfort, but it will reinforce your idea that the church scoundrels alter their words, to make them more acceptable before printing them in the Ensign.

When I was an institute teacher at the Moscow, ID Institute we used to videotape the conference talks, and felt a lot of pride that we had "a complete set of conference talks" (whatever that means.

Anyway, I was reading Sunstone one day about Ron Poelman's talk in the 1980's (84? 86?) that was completely re-touched. The GAs did not like his talk because it seemed to give members permission to make independent decisions, rather than making the church the center of their lives. I believe his talk was called, "The Difference Between the Church and the Gospel." In other words, "the gospel" or your inner spiritual life is more important than the church (he referred to it as "merely the scaffolding" for the gospel.

I found the talk among the video taped cassettes. Sure enough, the videotaped version we had in our library was refreshing, common sense, and offered a balanced perspective - unusual for the times. And sure enough, the doctored talk was much different.

The GAs had Poelman give his doctored/amended version of the talk the next Monday in the empty Tabernacle, with the lights turned down. The dummies even supplied a cough track, to make the kinds of normal background sounds you hear when people are in the audience.

I used to give my institute classes both written versions of the talk (Sunstone provided the side-by-side versions) as well as show them the original talk and then the doctored video taped version that was sent to ward libraries.

It was fun to merely ask: Why did they do that?

The point is, the GAs are lousy cheats and liars.

Ken- this is great supplementary material for your Lyin'for the Lord presentation list.

Can you get us the original talk by Oaks?

This refilming is creepy- reminds me of scenes from the fake moon landing movie "Capricorn One." Can you imagine Oaks escaping and running down the streets of downtown SLC, hiding in alleyways as the Mormon Men in Black chase him down with stun guns:

You WILL do this....

Anagrammy

I want to throw up. I too, saw on line both copies of Poolman's talk of which you speak. It was totally different the second time, as I guess he was offering people too much free agency. Whatever, I mean it just really makes me sick. And my daughter watched it all, heard every word ( of Oakes talk that is) and I am sure she never bothered to read THAT corrected version in the Ensign as she already knew what he had to say on the subject.

Do you still have a copy of this? It would be rad if it was put online.

I'm not sure where you read an altered version of the talk, but I just listened to the talk and read the Ensign version off lds.org and they were pretty much identical. Just wondering where you read a different version?

If you read 5 posts above, posted by Ken, thank you Ken, you will understand exactly what they do. They remake the conference video talk to match with the new words they write in the Ensign.

I just added to my top post, at the end of it, the last 2 paragraphs of Oakes printed talk from the Ensign which are absolutely the opposite of what he said that day he originally gave his talk. It was awful. I watched every minute of it live on TV and was just horrified. Luckily most of my kids do not listen or read the ensign, I guess. We never did, boring. But my one daughter watches every minute of conference and that is where she got this idea to treat me like crap, the apostate!

EXACTLY!

Below are various video clips of the podium-delivered version:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mxwt8oyUHC8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdjmfDQhYpE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SdjmfDQhYpE&feature=related

http://wn.com/Dallin_H_Oaks


Would be interested to know where, and how substantial the differences are, between the Conference-given and Ensign-published versions. A relatiely easy way to find out would be to listen to the delivered talk while simultanesouly following along reading the printed talk.

(***CAUTIONARY NOTE: This assumes that the video hasn't itself been altered and edited; notice that the last three links provided above start with an abrupt change in visual angle while Oaks is beginning to speak).



Edited 11 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2010 10:51PM by steve benson.

At the final few paragraphs, at least, it looks like the transcript agrees with the talk as originally presented.

I was the one who called BS is the original thread, think4u, and I hope I didn't seem to come down too hard. I didn't see the original talk, and I can't rule out the possibility that the talk was rerecorded for online posting. Since there's no way for me to verify your story, I hope you won't be offended that I remain skeptical. I'm not calling you a liar; I just can't verify your claim, and I think it would be irresponsible to just take your word for it.

In any case, I'm sorry for the pain that you've suffered due to DHO's words, misinterpreted or otherwise.

The final 3 paragraphs were absolutely NOT in his original talk- the entire theme of his talk was just the opposite as I wrote at the end of my original post above. Everyone is free to believe as they wish. This is America!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2010 09:48PM by think4u.

Wouldn't it be great if we could have a website devoted to the actual original Conference talks - you know, of historical interest, since they don't last.

I just watched the youtube links and the video from the church website while reading along with the text from the church website and am unable to see any difference.

I do remember him giving that talk along with Hollands fake Book of Mormon trick, and I admit being somewhat upset. However, at that time I was still in my anger phase and in a lot of turmoil with members of my family over us leaving.

But watching the videos and reading the words, I have to agree that they are not changed, but indeed my perception has changed.

Read what Ken wrote above about how they redo the videos before posting them online if needed , and you will understand. They made him redo it standing at that podium in the dark, and wrote THOSE new words in the ensign. And it has been done before. Many people on this board were really pissed off about his original talk. What you see on line now is a take 2 without an audience this time and with different words that match the talk in the ensign!

As I posted, I too was pissed and or upset last year when I heard D'Hoaxes talk and did post about it. I also confonted my parents about it which became a very unpleasant revelation about how my family feels about me...which includes the disowning of grandchildren and great grandchildren.

And you are probably right. Theyprobably changed the video as well. I merely pointed out that I watched both video cources and read along both times and did not see a difference in the available sources.

That is the keyword: AVAILABLE sources. Of course they will try to hide and have probably destroyed the original! Why would they ever let that out? I am sure they learned from the Poelman incident when both copies were out there on line to never let that happen again.

If I put on my Mormon idiot hat and tie the strings real tight so it cuts off the circulation to my brain, it seems reasonable enough. All you have to do is buy the premise that them's the rules and even God has to follow them.

That last paragraph you posted is exactly what he said, and not a word about apostates. Do you think they changed the video?

I remember the discussion here, during and after the October 2009 conference. Now that I've heard the talk, unless it's been changed, I have to say it does seem that a lot was read into it.

One way to tell would be to go back and watch the video of Packer from October 2010 and see if it now matches the print version, which we know was altered.

I heard the talk live,every word, sitting in front of the TV, and yes I do testify that they have changed the video, radically. The BKP tape does not necessarily apply, because they did it openly, told the public through the news media that there were going to be changes in his words. NO ONE EVER heard a word about the changes to Oakes talk, they have changed it in secret hoping no one notices. I heard every word, as did colonel Moroni, LIVE, that day, and we were horrified, and scared our kids would have nothing more to do with us!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/19/2010 11:34PM by think4u.

the GA's are lying sacks of shite.

Yeah, that!

I did not listen to this entire podcast. However there is this reference to Oaks talk in the comments section:


"My favorite talk of this Conference came from Elder Uchtdorf on God's love. (in complete contrast to Elder Oaks obedience talk on God's conditional love and mercy only being extended to those who have obeyed the laws)."


http://mormonexpression.com/2009/10/episode-17b-179th-semiannual-general-conference-sunday-review/

Perhaps, think4u, you can listen and get some validation for your recollection. It sure seems to me like he said God's love was conditional.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/20/2010 09:09PM by Twinker.

After the posts on Hollands talk, I went directly to the conference webpage at LDS dot org as soon as they became available and downloaded talks from Oaks, Holland, McCallister and Nelson on 6th of October and there is no discrepency.

The "properties" field shows that I downloaded them at 10:24 am EST on the 6th 2009.

They would have had to rerecord the talk within the next two days since the videos and audio files appear usually within 48 hours.

Then they did, and to twinker I as well remember Dieter's talk in the following April conference. I believe it was the very first one, and Colonel Moroni and I watched it and figured he was told to counter the damage done by Oakes. It was very very kind, all about loving unconditionally, as Christ did.

It is very clear in our minds that Oakes talk (entitle love and law because law supercedes love) was all about the fact that even God's love for us is conditional upon our obedience to his commandments, and that we have no obligation whatsoever to love family members who do not live the commandments. I swear my life on it. Interesting, that is the day my daughter quit talking to me,



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 12/22/2010 01:28PM by think4u.

I remember it fairly well. Holland acting outreaged while holding up a phony copy of Hyrums BoM, Oaks giving his talk, McCallister wasn't much nicer and Nelson always has something wrong to say.

There was a lot of buzz on this board, but I do not recall any mention of Oaks' message excepct for the content.

By contrast, when the Packed one delivered his message and the church changed it, they did not mention it in the Desnews until it was already being blogged by critics.

Likewise, there was a couple of church statements and FAIR discussions that came out about the discrepency between the picture of Hyrums book in the churchnews a year before and the copy Holland was holding.

None of those events went unnoticed.
But there were no such reports or commentaries regarding Oaks' message except that it was seen as mean-spirited.

A lot of us cried foul, but I do not recall any of us mentioning a replacement article/video.

Again, by contrast you can watch Packers original video on LDS dot org and read the changed text from the same link.

I saw Oaks' message as an attack on me, and as encouragement to my parents to shun me which they have done. And as I said, I confronted them about it and his talk. But again, I must stress that as far as I can tell, the only change has been in my perception between the anger that I felt then, and the acceptance of the message made by an uninspired lawyer who plays Apostle on Sundays.

I also don't give a damn if anyone believes me. :)

When I first saw this talk it was a youtube clip already. And it was 9-10 minutes long, I specifically remember that, thinking, "oh that's a lot of morg drivel to sit through.
Now it is just over eight minutes and Hoax is speaking with calm measured tones. The first time I watched it he was very fired up and emphasised that god's love is NOT unconditional. That point is nowhere in the talk now. Not like he said it originally.
I should have downloaded it. I watched that talk several times in outrage and I clearly remember he practically pounded the podium and spit as he said NOT unconditional.

When I am a rich bastard I think I want to make a project of recording the conferences. For my own personal comparison. I would never dream of doing anything beyond personal use with copyrighted material. Of course not.

I think JoD has it right. The change is in your perception. You cannot reasonably claim the talk was changed if you do not have an actual transcript or video of the supposed original. Your memory of the talk DOES NOT constitute evidence that it was changed. I could be wrong, but if the talk was really edited, we would have evidence other than someones memory of it. Just saying.

Oh really, and what evidence would we have? You do not think the church would redo and hide the original evidence as quickly as possible? You seem to be very trusting of TSSC-are you possibly still a member and paid to protect their image? Well, I saw it , heard it , and it has impacted my life in a horrible way, and I would not lie; rather than do so I would suffer my life to be taken. "God's love IS NOT unconditional, we must obey his commandments to earn it- love does not trump the law-" and on and on with the same talk within our families - Cross my heart!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 12/22/2010 07:39PM by think4u.

I am not a defender of the cult and neither is chainsofmind, I'm sure. All I said was that I am unable to find any evidence, and I saw it too. And no, there is no nefarious act which the church could concoct which would surprise me.

Anyway, if it looks different then it looks different.

But don't bash others just because they agree with me.

I am far from still being a member!! In fact, I resigned years ago, am an atheist, and generally against most religion. But...I am a skeptic therefore require evidence. With all the people with dvr's etc, it seems to me that someone would have the 'original' if it was altered. And like I said, I could be wrong. My point is, it is pointless to speculate on the changes if the only evidence we have is peoples memory of what they heard, which is not a reliable indicator of what really was said.

The videos Benson linked were uploaded on Oct 3, 2009. I believe they would have to be original videos. Have you watched those to see what he says?